Evaluation of the ability of the criminal justice system toachieve the principles of justice
Students and teachers should note that sample answers to activities requiring student evaluation, such as this activity, will only be provided on this website for Chapter 1 questions. The intention is to provide students with an initial guide on how to approach these types of questions. It is then up to each student to complete evaluations contained within future chapters by manipulating the information contained in the relevant tables.
Question 1
The task word ‘discuss’ require students to consider both sides of something. In this case, ‘discussing’ the ability of the criminal justice system to achieve the principles of justice requires students to write about relevant strengths and weaknesses. For this activity, students should aim to cover the burden of proof.
A discussion may include the following points:
- The party making the allegations must be prepared to explain what they are and prove their legitimacy before the defendant needs to prove reasons to find them not guilty – this protects the presumption of innocence, giving greater fairness. The prosecution will be discouraged from bringing unsubstantiated charges because they have to prove the claims with evidence before the defendant will be asked to bring any defence – having proper grounds to put an individual through the ordeal of a prosecution is part of fairness.
However, the state, representing the party that has already been injured, bears the burden of starting the trial and leading all of the evidence first – if they cannot do this adequately, the case is dismissed and the party that might be in the wrong, the accused, is protected, which is unfair.
- The individual is protected from the greater power of the state by the state having the greater burden – this achieves a closer equality between the parties, who are otherwise not on a level playing field in a criminal case, contributing to increased fairness. For example, the prosecution must disclose all evidence to the accused at the committal hearing, then must lead that evidence first in trial. The state has greater resources for finding evidence than an individual does, but all this evidence (whether it helps the prosecution’s case or hurts it) must be shown to the defence, before the defence launches its own case.
However, the burden of proof does not do enough to equalise the parties in a criminal case – the state still has overwhelming resources compared with a private accused, and the prosecutor is not using her or his own private money to fund investigations and court proceedings; furthermore, the state will never have suffered the disadvantage of being held in custody in the lead-up to trial. In addition, in terms of evidence and legal arguments, equality is not achieved between the parties because the benefit is given to the defendant – the accused party can discover all evidence against them before they even start to decide what their defence is going to be.
Question 2
The task word ‘evaluate’ require students to consider both sides of something, as well as express an opinion judging the relative strengths of the arguments. For example, a student might argue, based on evidence when referring to the burden of proof, that the criminal justice system does achieve the principles of justice. In this case, ‘evaluating’ the ability of the criminal justice system to achieve the principles of justice requires students to write about relevant strengths and weaknesses.
An evaluation may include the following points:
- The party making the allegations must be prepared to explain what they are and prove their legitimacy before the defendant needs to prove reasons to find them not guilty – this protects the presumption of innocence, giving greater fairness. The prosecution will be discouraged from bringing unsubstantiated charges because they have to prove the claims with evidence before the defendant will be asked to bring any defence – having proper grounds to put an individual through the ordeal of a prosecution is part of fairness.
However, the state, representing the party that has already been injured, bears the burden of starting the trial and leading all of the evidence first – if they cannot do this adequately, the case is dismissed and the party that might be in the wrong, the accused, is protected, which is unfair.
- The individual is protected from the greater power of the state by the state having the greater burden – this achieves a closer equality between the parties, who are otherwise not on a level playing field in a criminal case, contributing to increased fairness. For example, the prosecution must disclose all evidence to the accused at the committal hearing, then must lead that evidence first in trial. The state has greater resources for finding evidence than an individual does, but all this evidence (whether it helps the prosecution’s case or hurts it) must be shown to the defence, before the defence launches its own case.
However, the burden of proof does not do enough to equalise the parties in a criminal case – the state still has overwhelming resources compared with a private accused, and the prosecutor is not using her or his own private money to fund investigations and court proceedings; furthermore, the state will never have suffered the disadvantage of being held in custody in the lead-up to trial. In addition, in terms of evidence and legal arguments, equality is not achieved between the parties because the benefit is given to the defendant – the accused party can discover all evidence against them before they even start to decide what their defence is going to be.